221–230 of 327 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That proves that spinning up US fabs takes ages. Chinese fabs might not be so tied with red tape and regulation upon regulation (which is a funny reversal, in terms of "communism vs capitalism" bureucracy/inefficiency cold war thinking)
The Chinese don't have access to new EUV machines. All of their fabrication ability is based on old processes.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
spinning up fabs takes ages, micron has a US fab started bulding in 2023, its still not operational (projected to start mid-2027)
That proves that spinning up US fabs takes ages. Chinese fabs might not be so tied with red tape and regulation upon regulation (which is a funny reversal, in terms of "communism vs capitalism" bureucracy/inefficiency cold war thinking)
2.) Authoritarianism can move faster than anything. They can just say "wipe out that village, build the coal plant there, data center here, fab here.
3.) If it's red tape and regulation holding the US back, then that's clearly not "capitalism."
Apple has totally failed to deliver interesting AI experiences so far ... and I still think they're going to be the dominant provider of AI in 5 years. We're just one or two advances in chips / models / both away from being able to run very good local models for free on mid-tier Apple devices. The privacy, cost, and latency story there will be too much for OpenAI/Anthropic/Google to beat. Just writing this down so I…
Apple could probably sell a machine starting at $10,000 if they architected it as the sole place one’s Private Cloud Compute [1] ran. It would need a path to a $2,500 machine, I think. But this is a niche I don’t think another consumer-facing brand could do like Apple. [1] https://security.apple.com/blog/private-cloud-compute/
I asked an Apple (via a sales rep who visited our company to showcase in internal iPad healthcare app) to please do this for iCloud when iCloud Drive was in-development. We would have easily paid $50,000 for a rack-able Mac Pro you could point "managed" devices at. Apple simply cannot comprehend the ask.
Apple could probably sell a machine starting at $10,000 if they architected it as the sole place one’s Private Cloud Compute [1] ran. It would need a path to a $2,500 machine, I think. But this is a niche I don’t think another consumer-facing brand could do like Apple. [1] https://security.apple.com/blog/private-cloud-compute/
I asked an Apple (via a sales rep who visited our company to showcase in internal iPad healthcare app) to please do this for iCloud when iCloud Drive was in-development. We would have easily paid $50,000 for a rack-able Mac Pro you could point "managed" devices at. Apple simply cannot comprehend the ask.
Apple knows the market demand for this type of device.
You may have paid $50,000 for it, but you’re only one customer. At Apple scale they need to focus their finite resources on the products that serve the largest market demand.
$50,000 rack mount servers are not a large demand.
Apple has totally failed to deliver interesting AI experiences so far ... and I still think they're going to be the dominant provider of AI in 5 years. We're just one or two advances in chips / models / both away from being able to run very good local models for free on mid-tier Apple devices. The privacy, cost, and latency story there will be too much for OpenAI/Anthropic/Google to beat. Just writing this down so I…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Buying a new computer at +$500 just to have iMessage access feels insane to me. OpenClaw supports all the mainstream (and free) chat apps like Discord, WhatsApp, Signal, Telegram... None of them requiring a MacOS machine. Is it a lack of knowledge from the users or do they really value iMessage integration that much?
What I don't get is where is the Mac Mini Neo at like $350? Neos tiny motherboard in a box with some more ports would be awesome.
The relevant questions here are: will the person using this machine also conceivably be wearing a pair of $549 AirPod Max? Or a $399 base Apple Watch? Does that person expect to pay more or less for their largest-screen computing device than their headphones?
Framing that way points toward a $350 price point being a laptop for young children (younger than Apple Watch age, so lower elementary). That's a whole different software experience beyond just the hardware.
Apple has totally failed to deliver interesting AI experiences so far ... and I still think they're going to be the dominant provider of AI in 5 years. We're just one or two advances in chips / models / both away from being able to run very good local models for free on mid-tier Apple devices. The privacy, cost, and latency story there will be too much for OpenAI/Anthropic/Google to beat. Just writing this down so I…
The one thing that is marginally exciting: the Apple SoC or M series chips.
It's unfortunate they are locked behind crappy macOS and other proprietary apple crap.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Good on ya. I'm not interested in fighting about this stuff. I've had people hating on me for using Apple since the 1980s. It gets a bit old. Sort of like high school popularity contests.
I'm an exclusive Apple user for a couple decades so I'm not fighting here :) just acknowledging the fact that Apple has some deficiencies
As an Apple developer, since then, I have been incandescent with rage at Apple, many times.
Guess I’m a walking demonstration of Stockholm Syndrome (at least, that’s what I’ve been told).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That proves that spinning up US fabs takes ages. Chinese fabs might not be so tied with red tape and regulation upon regulation (which is a funny reversal, in terms of "communism vs capitalism" bureucracy/inefficiency cold war thinking)
1.) China is not communist, even remotely so. China is fascist in every sense of the word. 2.) Authoritarianism can move faster than anything. They can just say "wipe out that village, build the coal plant there, data center here, fab here. 3.) If it's red tape and regulation holding the US back, then that's clearly not "capitalism."
Except in the actual historical sense. They appear to enjoy all sorts of freedoms, increased prosperity, even have elections at different levels but under a single party system. Which is not necessarily that different than a effectively two party system.
>2.) Authoritarianism can move faster than anything. They can just say "wipe out that village, build the coal plant there, data center here, fab here.
Now that China is more effective, "it's easy because they're authoritarian". Before the argument was "authoritarianism can never be as effective as free-market democracy".
>3.) If it's red tape and regulation holding the US back, then that's clearly not "capitalism."
It's real world capitalism, not some fantasy some guy imagined removing all warts.